Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: “Pope Francis: it’s time to protect the children and restore the faith.” [View all]EvilAL
(1,437 posts)98. It's too bad that
Other bishops and cardinals and maybe even the Pope don't do something about it now. They certainly can and make a good point at the same time. The problem here is they won't. They have no reason not to.
The Pope should call him in, tell him what he did was wrong and send him packing. Then make a statement that there are more coming. The Pope doesn't do this though, the guy is still there even though we all know what he did. That's why people are pissed off and can't understand why people support an organization that has been doing this to children for centuries.. with hardly any repercussions. Confess..get forgiven.. rape children.. Confess..get forgiven..rape children... repeat. .
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
110 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
“Pope Francis: it’s time to protect the children and restore the faith.” [View all]
mr blur
Feb 2016
OP
Looks like juror #6 pegged it! It's so sad to see the impotent rage of apologists on vacation.
cleanhippie
Feb 2016
#27
It's funny they can gin up the outrage to picket a fictional movie, but not for child rape in the
AtheistCrusader
Feb 2016
#6
Given even the AG of Massachusetts says Law committed no crime, what punishment is due?
happyslug
Feb 2016
#15
Law was well liked by John Paul II, mostly for Law's Civil Rights Work in the 1950s and 1960s
happyslug
Feb 2016
#25
Does it bother you at all that civil courts are instructing religious institutions in moral behavior
LiberalAndProud
Feb 2016
#21
The Courts do NOT make judgement calls on Morals, they award damages for actual harm done
happyslug
Feb 2016
#24
So you quote a Bishop who stated the "Age of Reason is age 1" as to saying 7 year old is at fault
happyslug
Mar 2016
#32
This is disgusting. No, people in other large institutions did not have similar problems.
trotsky
Mar 2016
#33
You should do some study on the subject, you will find it is a common problem
happyslug
Mar 2016
#39
I have absolutely zero interest in researching the repulsive bullshit you're posting.
trotsky
Mar 2016
#40
What desperate, ridiculous drivel. You should be ashamed of yourself - and your church.
mr blur
Mar 2016
#34
I did NOT say seven year old can have sex, but that the Bishop's comment dies reflect the law
happyslug
Mar 2016
#36
BUT THE CHILD DIDN'T COMMIT A CRIME. THE CHILD WAS RAPED. THE CHILD WAS THE VICTIM.
trotsky
Mar 2016
#38
Morally, Yes, Legally No, and what is required by law is what I am discussing
happyslug
Mar 2016
#45
No we aren't - this subthread in particular was discussing the unique horrors...
trotsky
Mar 2016
#48
I think so much of the problem comes from historically, the church putting itself and canon law...
trotsky
Mar 2016
#58
There's no way to ignore the face-saving features of these actions, no doubt.
LiberalAndProud
Mar 2016
#63
How many types of offenders should fall under your child support umbrella?
LiberalAndProud
Mar 2016
#92
I have never met you, and I hope that I never do, but I'm taking you off Ignore long enough
mr blur
Mar 2016
#93
I have been helping such victims for over 25 years, thus I am a "self-centred piece of shit."
happyslug
Mar 2016
#100
Again you are assuming that fuckers who rape children will even pay child support
kdmorris
Mar 2016
#103
But the state says it is the family member who is abuser who must provide the support.
happyslug
Mar 2016
#101